Murphy v. Boston & Maine Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtLummus, J.
In this action of tort for personal injuries sustained by a fall on High Street in Medford where that street crosses the tracks of the defendant, the only question before us is the sufficiency of a notice given by the plaintiff.
By G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 84, § 18, as it appears in St. 1933, c, 114, § 1, the plaintiff was required within thirty days to give to the “person” obliged by law to keep the way in repair, notice, among other things, of the “cause” of her injury. The defendant corporation was a “person” entitled to notice under that section. Dickie v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 131 Mass.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Laskowski v. ManningMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
- Hurlburt v. Town of Great BarringtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
- Dickie v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Merrill v. PaigeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
- Carey v. MalleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ram v. Town of CharltonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
- Meyer v. Veolia Energy North AmericaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2019
- Estabrook v. City of SomervilleMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1996
- Pittore v. City of BostonMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1987